Classification of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome by types of fatigue.

Persons with myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) often complain of fatigue states (eg, postexertional malaise, brain fog) that are qualitatively different than normal, daily fatigue. Given the heterogeneous nature of ME/CFS, it is likely that individuals with this illness experience these fatigue types differently in terms of severity and frequency. It is also possible that meaningful subgroups of patients exist that exhibit different patterns of the fatigue experience. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether individuals with ME/CFS can be classified in a meaningful way according to the different types of fatigue they experience. One hundred individuals with ME/CFS participated in the study. Individuals that met inclusion criteria were administered the Multiple Fatigue Types Questionnaire (MFTQ), a 5-factor instrument that distinguishes between different types of fatigue. A cluster analysis was used to classify patients into various clusters based on factor subscale scores. Using a 3-factor solution, individuals were classified according to illness severity (low, moderate, severe) across the different fatigue factors. However, a 5-cluster solution enabled participants with moderate to severe fatigue levels to fall into more differentiated clusters and demonstrate distinct fatigue state patterns. These results suggest that fatigue patterns of individuals with ME/CFS are heterogeneous, and that patients may be classified into meaningful subgroups.

Alternative medical interventions used in the treatment and management of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome and fibromyalgia.

BACKGROUND: There have been several systematic reviews attempting to evaluate the efficacy of possible treatments for myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) and fibromyalgia (FM). However, information regarding the efficacy of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has not been comprehensively or systematically covered in these reviews, despite its frequent use in the patient community. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to systematically review and evaluate the current literature related to alternative and complementary treatments for ME/CFS and FM. It should be stressed that the treatments evaluated in this review do not reflect the clinical approach used by most practitioners to treat these illnesses, which include a mix of natural and unconventionally used medications and natural hormones tailored to each individual case. However, nearly all clinical research has focused on the utility of single CAM interventions, and thus is the primary focus of this review. METHODS: Several databases (e.g., PubMed, MEDLINE,((R)) PsychInfo) were systematically searched for randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials of alternative treatments and nonpharmacological supplements. Included studies were checked for references and several experts were contacted for referred articles. Two leading subspecialty journals were also searched by hand. Data were then extracted from included studies and quality assessments were conducted using the Jadad scale. RESULTS: Upon completion of the literature search and the exclusion of studies not meeting criterion, a total of 70 controlled clinical trials were included in the review. Sixty (60) of the 70 studies found at least one positive effect of the intervention (86%), and 52 studies also found improvement in an illness-specific symptom (74%). The methodological quality of reporting was generally poor. CONCLUSIONS: Several types of alternative medicine have some potential for future clinical research. However, due to methodological inconsistencies across studies and the small body of evidence, no firm conclusions can be made at this time. Regarding alternative treatments, acupuncture and several types of meditative practice show the most promise for future scientific investigation. Likewise, magnesium, l-carnitine, and S-adenosylmethionine are nonpharmacological supplements with the most potential for further research. Individualized treatment plans that involve several pharmacological agents and natural remedies appear promising as well.

A longitudinal analysis of psychiatric severity upon outcomes among substance abusers residing in self-help settings.

A longitudinal analysis of psychiatric severity was conducted with a national sample of recovering substance abusers living in Oxford Houses, which are self-run, self-help settings. Outcomes related to residents' psychiatric severity were examined at three follow-up intervals over one year. Over time, Oxford House residents with high versus low baseline psychiatric severity reported significantly more days using psychiatric medication, decreased outpatient psychiatric treatment, yet no significant differences for number of days abstinent and time living in an Oxford House. These findings suggest that a high level of psychiatric severity is not an impediment to residing in self-run, self-help settings such as Oxford House among persons with psychiatric comorbid substance use disorders.